为了设置场景,这里有一堆我们将使用的语言扩展,以及来自 CLaSH 的一些简化定义:
{-# LANGUAGE GADTs, StandaloneDeriving #-}
{-# LANGUAGE TypeOperators, DataKinds, PolyKinds #-}
{-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilyDependencies, FlexibleContexts, FlexibleInstances #-}
{-# LANGUAGE PatternSynonyms #-}
{-# LANGUAGE QuantifiedConstraints #-}
data Signal dom a
instance Functor (Signal dom) where
instance Applicative (Signal dom) where
class Bundle a where
type Unbundled dom a = res | res -> dom a
bundle :: Unbundled dom a -> Signal dom a
unbundle :: Signal dom a -> Unbundled dom a
我想Bundle
为 n 元产品类型创建实例。类型本身定义如下:
import Control.Monad.Identity
data ProductF (f :: * -> *) (ts :: [*]) where
NilP :: ProductF f '[]
ConsP :: f a -> ProductF f ts -> ProductF f (a : ts)
deriving instance (Show (f t), Show (ProductF f ts)) => Show (ProductF f (t : ts))
headPF :: ProductF f (t : ts) -> f t
headPF (ConsP x xs) = x
tailP :: ProductF f (t : ts) -> ProductF f ts
tailP (ConsP x xs) = xs
-- Utilities for the simple case
type Product = ProductF Identity
infixr 5 ::>
pattern (::>) :: t -> Product ts -> Product (t : ts)
pattern x ::> xs = ConsP (Identity x) xs
headP :: Product (t : ts) -> t
headP (x ::> xs) = x
我想写的是一个Bundle
简单地替换Identity
为Signal dom
. 不幸的是,我们不能一口气做到这一点:
instance Bundle (Product ts) where
type Unbundled dom (Product ts) = ProductF (Signal dom) ts
bundle NilP = pure NilP
bundle (ConsP x xs) = (::>) <$> x <*> bundle xs
unbundle = _ -- Can't implement this, since it would require splitting on ts
在这里,unbundle
需要对 forts ~ []
和 for做一些不同的事情ts ~ t : ts'
。好的,让我们尝试在两种情况下编写它:
instance Bundle (Product '[]) where
type Unbundled dom (Product '[]) = ProductF (Signal dom) '[]
bundle NilP = pure NilP
unbundle _ = NilP
instance (Bundle (Product ts), forall dom. Unbundled dom (Product ts) ~ ProductF (Signal dom) ts) => Bundle (Product (t : ts)) where
type Unbundled dom (Product (t : ts)) = ProductF (Signal dom) (t : ts)
bundle (ConsP x xs) = (::>) <$> x <*> bundle xs
unbundle xs = ConsP (headP <$> xs) (unbundle $ tailP <$> xs)
因此,正是在第二种情况下出现了问题。即使我们forall dom. Unbundled dom (Product ts) ~ ProductF (Signal dom) ts
在实例约束中有一个(量化的)类型相等,GHC 8.6.3 在类型检查期间也不会使用它:
对于bundle
:
• Couldn't match type ‘Unbundled dom (Product ts)’ with ‘ProductF (Signal dom) ts’ Expected type: Unbundled dom (Product ts) Actual type: ProductF (Signal dom) ts1 • In the first argument of ‘bundle’, namely ‘xs’ In the second argument of ‘(<*>)’, namely ‘bundle xs’ In the expression: (::>) <$> x <*> bundle xs
对于unbundle
:
• Couldn't match expected type ‘ProductF (Signal dom) ts’ with actual type ‘Unbundled dom (ProductF Identity ts)’ • In the second argument of ‘ConsP’, namely ‘(unbundle $ tailP <$> xs)’ In the expression: ConsP (headP <$> xs) (unbundle $ tailP <$> xs) In an equation for ‘unbundle’: unbundle xs = ConsP (headP <$> xs) (unbundle $ tailP <$> xs)
一种可能的解决方法
当然,我们可以只走很长的路:专门为此创建我们自己的类,Product
并将所有实际工作委托给它。我在这里介绍该解决方案,但我对比这更简洁和临时的东西特别感兴趣。
class IsProduct (ts :: [*]) where
type UnbundledProd dom ts = (ts' :: [*]) | ts' -> dom ts
bundleProd :: Product (UnbundledProd dom ts) -> Signal dom (Product ts)
unbundleProd :: Signal dom (Product ts) -> Product (UnbundledProd dom ts)
instance (IsProduct ts) => Bundle (Product ts) where
type Unbundled dom (Product ts) = Product (UnbundledProd dom ts)
bundle = bundleProd
unbundle = unbundleProd
然后IsProduct
具有可以实际实现的优点:
type (:::) (name :: k) (a :: k1) = (a :: k1)
instance IsProduct '[] where
type UnbundledProd dom '[] = dom ::: '[]
bundleProd NilP = pure NilP
unbundleProd _ = NilP
instance (IsProduct ts) => IsProduct (t : ts) where
type UnbundledProd dom (t : ts) = Signal dom t : UnbundledProd dom ts
bundleProd (x ::> xs) = (::>) <$> x <*> bundleProd xs
unbundleProd xs = (headP <$> xs) ::> (unbundleProd $ tailP <$> xs)